Putting HDD in a case

Are there any disadvantages to putting a hard drive in a separate case and using it through usb 3.0?

Performance/lifespan/heat wise

if it's portability you want, get a proper carry case

those things are also notoriously cheaply made and brittle

I don't want portability, I just already have 3 drives in the computer case and don't want to add a whole new cage inside because of airflow

i'd rather have less optimal air flow than use an hdd cradle

Why?

There's a minor hit on read/write performance, same as with nearly any external drive enclosure. That behemoth you posted, though...wut? Does it only hold one drive? Why is it MSconsolehuge?

because those things are utter garbage, not to mention a fucking hazard. way slower than sata, the power supplies are usually even shittier than the cradle, the hard drives are slotted in and there's no locking mechanism, etc.

unless you only have a laptop, or you need to be backing up and swapping drives all the time, there's really no reason to use a cradle

how about the hdd enclosure?

what about an enclosure? just a simple box with sata to usb converter

better but not ideal. do you have free 5 1/4 bays? because that would easily solve your problem

>5 1/4 bay
how does this give me sata to usb conversion?

no? it gives direct sata acess, it's mounted in the case

pic related, there are tons of these things

Honestly man I just asked if using an hdd as a usb drive in an outside case ha sany disadvantages speed/lifespam wise, i really don't care about other options for putting it in my case

Will it affect the drive in any way? I'm planning to use a drive that has luks encryption on it externally. Bad idea? I really want a quality one because its for a super important backup that I really can't have failing on me.

I was looking into one of these but external, they're so fucking expensive. Even the internal ones aren't too cheap especially those that have hardware io switches

>usb 3.0

Why all the hate for eSATA?

Of course it's going to be slower dumbass,

Usb 3 is ~500 Mbits/sec
SATA 3 is 6 Gbits/sec

And you'd need a drive with above 90MB/s for 3.0 to be a bottle neck. Additionally gentoo exists so that bottle neck can be raised to 180MB/SB beyond all hhard disks

Not really, I use a usb 3.0 one and get the same ~100 MB/s transfer rate of interal drives.

Not op but i never could get Esata to work, it's a shame really i think it's some shit in my bios but even when i enabled it , never showed up, (the Esata port is on my motherboard itself too so it should've supported it)

i dont understand, usb 3 is slower but you need a faster drive for it to be a bottleneck? this makes no sense

If it's a mechanical drive and it's using USB3, speeds truly don't matter.

he is saying the HDD is the bottleneck, not the interface.

HDDs themselves physically don't write that fast...

The interface is irrelevant if the speeds of the hardware are slow...

Sending a 56kbps dial up signal over Ethernet doesn't make it faster...

Transferring data over a SATA connection on a slow as fuck HDD doesn't make it faster either.

>...
Stop that.

doesn't look MSconsolehuge to me

With uas on usb3 its quite fine. Without it SATA is much superior.
Lifespan won't change much though of course you have the chance to tangle the cable and catapult the operating platter into a wall.